Book Review: Pierre Bayard’s – How to talk about books you haven’t read
My first resp
onse to the title of Pierre Bayard’s book– “How to talk about books you haven’t read”—was to think it was a joke. The author couldn’t intend for us to feign knowledge we don’t possess, could he? That response got to the heart of what I found interesting as well as uncomfortable about this book.
The author, Bayard, a French, post-modern professor and psychoanalyst has a very different grasp on language, values, and behavior than I do. Bayard presents non-reading as such a commonplace transgression that it can’t possibly be considered a transgression; furthermore, he insists it’s only the naïve that enter into literature and actually read it. Unless I’m to presume this entire book unfolds as a satire—and if that’s what it is, it’s done amazingly well—then this is a great example of a post- modern perspective on how knowledge of a subject is relative to, or rooted in, the individual, and how consideration of morals in an absolute form is discouraged.
Bayard encourages speaking in ambiguous language when it comes to talking about books you haven’t read. In such a conversation, the transgression would be asking clear questions, or making factual statements. If you’re in fact feigning a knowledge, the author suggests you lean into what you know about the author, or the genre of literature. If, on the other hand, you’re talking to the presumed book expert then you mustn’t ask precise questions; your version of reality might not jibe with the presumed expert’s virtual reality. I find this a bit amusing: the author presents tips and ideas about conversations between two individuals talking about something that neither has read! How is this possible? Well these conversations about books specifically and culture broadly can be characterized as making use of one’s “virtual library” or entering into each others own personal subjective reality.
Imagine, for example, Jane has read some articles on social media, she has her perceptions of it from television, and a month ago she opened a Twitter account. This is the extant of Jane’s inner reality on this matter or her virtual library on the field of social media. In reality, she is an expert in social work but mistakenly goes to a world-class conference on social media. With her virtual library on social media, according to Bayard, there is no reason that Jane can’t engage with conferees if not lead a workshop on social media. If she can stay ambiguous enough, and if conferees don’t seek clarity, or aren’t concerned with reality broader than or more specific than what Jane can communicate – all will be well.
If this is post-modern scholarship, I guess I’ll stay in in modernity! That said, I did find many things insightful and helpful, such as the need to understand a broad base of literature in a field and find the book you’re reading in it’s literary context. Also this: the reality that once we’ve starting reading, we’ve started forgetting; something I’m well acquainted with. Forgetting challenges the position that you actually read the book in the first place, which is an interesting idea. As Bayard mentions, it’s more accurate to talk about our approximate recollections of books.
Throughout the book, Bayard stresses the importance of our frame of reference, our understanding of a book, or a culture. I believe this is one of the values of postmodernity: it takes into an account that my perception of reality may be very different from the person I’m talking to, so our realities are very pliable, very subjective. Another important point is that books and specific knowledge on a subject do seem to get absorbed into the conversation around it. In that sense, it’s the conversation that matters and the book becomes virtual or transparent.
I’m glad to have read Bayard’s book about “talking about books you haven’t read” and I believe it deserves a sequel, “talking about books that do actually exist, that are actually read, in a post-modern culture”. But no one would read it. . .
About the Author
Dave Young
husband, dad, friend, student of culture and a pastor.5 responses to “Book Review: Pierre Bayard’s – How to talk about books you haven’t read”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Dave, way to get us started off strong! Would you say that books are simply one piece of the knowledge puzzle that a scholar/student uses in his pursuit? A single line of a book, or a concept, may serve as the genesis point for a life-changing understanding even for a non-reader… That understanding may throw open wide the doors of discovery!
Jon
Jon, I love the modern/post-modern critique. There is definitely a level of permission being given by Bayard to “not read books” at various levels that many of us feel a sense of relief from, because most of us “don’t read” many parts of books because of time, volume and necessity. But that is very different from what a “modern” thinker might call a slippery slope of a complete hodgepodge “truth” being created by intellectual transgressions of what I was thinking of as pooled ignorance.
Jon: Sure, I agree with you. I didn’t mean to communicate every book needs to be read word for word. Also I personally need to learn the “skimming” skill. And I can learn from anyone, including Bayard. However, I find his perspective on subjective knowing to be over the top. Philip: I think this book leads into “hodgepodge truth” or a slippery slope morals.
Dave, you bring up a good point regarding morals. I enjoyed Bayard’ s book and think that the skill of effectively non-reading will become increasingly necessary. Where I would deviate from Bayard is in how our non-reading is presented. Bayard apparently finds no issue with giving the impression that you have read a particular book that you indeed have not read. While referencing an idea or a quote from a book need not be proceeded with a soliloquy regarding the depth in which you read or did not read the book, you should at least be honest if questioned. It is ok to say, “I didn’t read the book, but I am familiar with the concepts presented, the authors other work, etc.”
Brian: I appreciate the observation about the way our non-reading is presented. In normal peer discussion no one is checking on how many pages you’ve read, it has little impact on the ability to engage in the conversation at hand. Non-reading becomes deceptive when we present ourselves as having read something that we haven’t.